Trial reportTurkish journal of medical sciences2022
Detection method of intraoperative awareness: a randomized comparative study.
Trial report in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background: The incidence of intraoperative awareness varies in a wide range in the literature. The reasons for these different results include the questioning method used and the questioning time. The goal of this study is to compare the effectiveness of different questioning methods and times used in intraoperative awareness research for detecting the incidence.
methodsWe recruited patients between the ages of 18-70 years, with normal cognitive functions and able to speak after general anesthesia to the study. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. In Group 1 we applied the modified Brice questionnaire in the first 2 h and 24 h after surgery for investigating intraoperative awareness. In Group 2, 24 h after surgery, we asked about anesthesia satisfaction and patients' complaints, if any.
resultsThere was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of age (p = 0.514).The proportion of women was significantly higher (p = 0.002), the duration of anesthesia was shorter, and the rate of narcotic analgesic use was higher in Group 2 (p < 0.001). The assessment in the first 2 h showed the frequency of awareness was statistically higher in Group 1 than in Group 2 (p = 0.016). In the postoperative 24-h assessment, we found no significant difference in the incidence of intraoperative awareness between the groups (p < 0.05). In Group 1, there was no statistically significant difference in terms of incidence of awareness according to evaluation time (p = 250). DISCUSSION: The incidence of intraoperative awareness in Group 1 was significantly higher than in Group 2 in the evaluation conducted in the first 2 h. There was no significant difference in the determination of intraoperative awareness between questioning times in group 1.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.